Simon P. Lucy wrote: > On 04/01/2002 at 17:57 Gervase Markham wrote: > >>>I am not sure about the licensing, so here are my questions: >> >>Your questions would be best answered by reading the license :-) It's >>available at http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/ . We're happy to give you >>advice on what we (and most other people) think it means if you like. > > The only thing I'd add is that in your acknowledgement of the > mozilla/Netscape copyright that you also make it clear under which licence > you are distributing the .so In other words, say you are using the MPL/NPL > licence rather than the GPL. This is because the GPL does not recognise > file boundaries and you want to exclude the possiblity that someone could > claim your overall application was licenced in fact as GPL. > > Theoretically you could say the .so file was licenced under the LGPL, > however, the clearest position is to use the original MPL/NPL licence. > This means you can keep your own code/source etc under your own control.
The license allows you to use the code under either license, but not both at once. Pick one and follow those rules. If you pick GPL (which wouldn't fit your stated purpose) you need to follow GPL rules which include things like statements that the code is under GPL. If you pick MPL then you have to follow MPL rules which say (section 3.6) "include a notice stating that the Source Code version of the Covered Code is available under the terms of this License" Either way you will be making clear which license you have chosen. -Dan Veditz
